[Tagging] Mapping larger Mini-roundabouts

Peter Wendorff wendorff at uni-paderborn.de
Wed Jun 6 08:42:38 BST 2012

Am 06.06.2012 09:13, schrieb Martin Vonwald:
> IMO tagging a mini - no matter how large it is - as a way would be
> inconsistent with our way we map (most?) features.
> When mapping a
> street, we draw the way where one can drive/go. On a normal roundabout
> you can not drive in the middle, that's why we map it as circle. We
> agreed on junction=roundabout on a node just for the sake of
> simplicity, because otherwise people who don't want to draw circles
> tag them with mini_roundabout and our data quality suffers.
> Contrary on a mini-roundabout you can drive in the middle (ignoring
> any legal restrictions now), that's why we don't draw a loop but just
> a junction and add the tag highway=mini_roundabout to the junction
> node. Drawing it as a loop would be imo inconsistent.
> If you want to specify the dimension of the mini-roundabout I think it
> would be sufficient to specify the width of the approaching roads.
For highway=pedestrian, at platforms and many other things we allow to 
add area=yes to a feature to turn a circular way (ring) to a circular 
area (filled area, polygon).
If - and that's in fact more or less the result of the discussions we 
had in the last days - the difference between mini roundabouts and 
roundabouts is the traversability of the center part, I would say, 
mapping a mini roundabout as a way would in theory be sufficient without 
area=yes, because area=yes would be implied.
On the other hand I would propose to add area=yes to avoid confusion 
both at data consumer side as well as on mapper side (yes, they MEANT it 
to be a mini roundabout, I guess, because they knew it's an area without 
obstacle in the middle).


> Martin
> 2012/6/6 Stephen Hope<slhope at gmail.com>:
>> I was away most of last month, and missed most of the discussion of mini and
>> normal roundabouts.  However, looking at the wiki now, from what I can tell
>> the differences now are
>> -Roundabouts can be mapped as a way or node (though way is preferred), mini
>> roundabouts only as a node
>> -Roundabouts cannot be traversable, mini-roundabouts must be
>> So what do I do about a roundabout that has been mapped out as a way, but is
>> traversable?  This weekend I ran across a couple of new (to me) traversable
>> roundabouts on a street that used to have normal intersections.  When I
>> checked to see if they have been updated, they have been mapped as
>> roundabout ways. However, both these roundabouts are fully traversable, in
>> fact I saw a bus go across one.  How should this be tagged?  I
>> don't particularly want to remove the mapped way to tag as a node - if it
>> wasn't mapped as a way and was a normal capped roundabout I'd probably be
>> mapping it as a way myself.  Can we use a way marked as mini-roundabout?
>> Photo of one of these here http://dl.dropbox.com/u/21448164/IMG_0169C.jpg
>> Or another idea - since there are many mini-roundabouts tagged that aren't
>> really, so the tag is quite polluted at this time, and the only big
>> difference I can see now is if it is traversable or not, maybe we should
>> ignore mini-roundabout all together, just use roundabout and
>> traversable=yes/no.
>> Stephen
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

More information about the Tagging mailing list